Yes, but can they build it in time....

DervProf

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Sounds impressive.

But will it be enough houses, and can they build it in time, given that we're adding close to a million people every 2 years.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/hands-off-our-land/9165205/Countryside-planning-revolution-new-city-proposed-for-Midlands.html

Oh.....

Never mind.

You seem happy about this Hamish.

Might it be because you want your predictions to come true or that you don't want an end to HPI ?

Sorry, but you seem rather selfish and narrow minded.

Emy1501

DervProf wrote: »

You seem happy about this Hamish.

Might it be because you want your predictions to come true or that you don't want an end to HPI ?

Sorry, but you seem rather selfish and narrow minded.

Hamish Claims to have 2 houses and no kids. He dreams of HPI being 3x what it is now in real terms in 10-15 years.

The three things that I suspect that he believes may stop is dream is the bulding of lots of new houses, the stop of mass immigration and lenders continuing with sensible lending practises. Therefore he has no interest in houses being built especially in Scotland.

I suspect most people in his position have the same thought process.

DervProf

Emy1501 wrote: »

I suspect most people in his position have the same thought process.

Similar thought processes that take place in the minds of politicians, so it seems. Looking after No.1.

Fair enough, it's trait in every human, to a degree. However, the main theme of this board is to debate house prices and the economy. It is a pity that self interest takes over as often as it does.

IveSeenTheLight

DervProf wrote: »

. It is a pity that self interest takes over as often as it does.

Sometimes described as Vested Interest.
It's amazing how many can't see that there are vested interestes on both sides of the fence.

What people need to do is consider the thoughts from both sides and consider what is likely to happen in reality.

Currently the reality is showing that there is not sufficient housing being built to meet the requirements of the increased population.
That is the reality.

So what do you do about it?
If your vested interest is for lower prices, then you should be campaigning to adjust either the house building program, the immegration or indeed both.

Looking at population, the government promised restrictions on immigration, yet we see statistically it has net reduced from when they came into power.
Again, the VI for lower prices should be canvassing against the government for their failure to get a hold of the percieved problem and campaign pledge.

That said, merely stopping the increase in population will not necessarily make properties affordable to more.

Looking at house building, if you really want more people to be able to afford properties, house building needs to exceed population expansion.
Even then it will take time over a number of years to clear the backlog.
We also have to consider where the funds are to come from to facilitate such an expansion in property.

Regardless of which side of the VI fence you currently reside, you need to open your eyes and understand the fundamentals that is affecting the market as it is and the factors which would be required to change in order to suit your VI.

At the moment, it appears that the reality is heavily weighted toward property price expansion rather than contraction.

Emy1501

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Sometimes described as Vested Interest.
It's amazing how many can't see that there are vested interestes on both sides of the fence.

What people need to do is consider the thoughts from both sides and consider what is likely to happen in reality.

Currently the reality is showing that there is not sufficient housing being built to meet the requirements of the increased population.
That is the reality.

So what do you do about it?
If your vested interest is for lower prices, then you should be campaigning to adjust either the house building program, the immegration or indeed both.

Looking at population, the government promised restrictions on immigration, yet we see statistically it has net reduced from when they came into power.
Again, the VI for lower prices should be canvassing against the government for their failure to get a hold of the percieved problem and campaign pledge.

That said, merely stopping the increase in population will not necessarily make properties affordable to more.

Looking at house building, if you really want more people to be able to afford properties, house building needs to exceed population expansion.
Even then it will take time over a number of years to clear the backlog.
We also have to consider where the funds are to come from to facilitate such an expansion in property.

Regardless of which side of the VI fence you currently reside, you need to open your eyes and understand the fundamentals that is affecting the market as it is and the factors which would be required to change in order to suit your VI.

At the moment, it appears that the reality is heavily weighted toward property price expansion rather than contraction.

What I do not understand is why the same people with the VI in prices rises keep bringing up the same point again and again etc.

If people are so sure prices are going to go through the roof then why bother with the debate and why keep posting similar threads about House Building etc.

I suspect that some on here are trying to convince themselves of their beliefs.

The reality is that House prices are of little interest to the wider public and we saw that at the last election.

I suspect though that in due course immigration will be brought down and if houses need to be built they will be built.

If price rises are so obvious then I would suggest people get out there and keep buying their BTl's.

IveSeenTheLight

Emy1501 wrote: »

What I do not understand is why the same people with the VI in prices rises keep bringing up the same point again and again etc.

I would envisage because they are responding to the same arguments in which the fundamental factors have not changed.

I ask you, what has fundamentally changed to argue that house prices will fall sufficiently to allow a greater percentage of the population to afford?

Emy1501 wrote: »

I suspect that some on here are trying to convince themselves of their beliefs.

Possibly.......
More probably that the arguments put forward have been insufficient to change the mindset of long term house price growth beliefs.

As I said, in order for that to change there has to be a significant change in the fundamentals affecting house prices, which I have yet to see any evidence of.

Emy1501 wrote: »

The reality is that House prices are of little interest to the wider public and we saw that at the last election.

Hmmm, are you so sure of this?
With home ownership being circa 67% and continual desire to be homeowners by apercentage of the remainder, one would summise that house prices are of interest to the wider public.

That is the reality

Emy1501 wrote: »

I suspect though that in due course immigration will be brought down and if houses need to be built they will be built.

Could you explain why this has not happened so far and what will be the catalyst and supporting factors to change these stats?

Emy1501 wrote: »

If price rises are so obvious then I would suggest people get out there and keep buying their BTl's.

BTL is continuing to expand.
I personally expanded in December and have leased out that very property on a 3 year lease.

Emy1501

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I would envisage because they are responding to the same arguments in which the fundamental factors have not changed.

I ask you, what has fundamentally changed to argue that house prices will fall sufficiently to allow a greater percentage of the population to afford?



Possibly.......
More probably that the arguments put forward have been insufficient to change the mindset of long term house price growth beliefs.

As I said, in order for that to change there has to be a significant change in the fundamentals affecting house prices, which I have yet to see any evidence of.



Hmmm, are you so sure of this?
With home ownership being circa 67% and continual desire to be homeowners by apercentage of the remainder, one would summise that house prices are of interest to the wider public.

That is the reality



Could you explain why this has not happened so far and what will be the catalyst and supporting factors to change these stats?



BTL is continuing to expand.
I personally expanded in December and have leased out that very property on a 3 year lease.

Hamish started the thread not a so called property Bear.

I don't remember any debates about the housing market in any of the live TV debates which suggest that the population as a whole are not as interested in the housing market as you would think.

Builder are struggling to sell homes in the current market so why would they build more homes now? I know someone who tried to buy a property on 3 different developments between 2010-2011 but none of them was finished because the builder could not get enough buyers.

Also a number of porperties bought by builders near me in recent years stand empty and one of them is now being re sold back to the private market.

The reality is the only way for prices to crash is for rates to rise or mass unemployment.

Builders will build once any recovery takes off in my opinion.

If prices were rising at 10% a year I could see your point but as prices are going nowhere and haven't for at least 2 years them its not something the majority are going to worry about.

wymondham

probably could ... builders slap them up in no time these days, thats the main reason they are poor quality...

wotsthat

Emy1501 wrote: »

I don't remember any debates about the housing market in any of the live TV debates which suggest that the population as a whole are not as interested in the housing market as you would think.

We're sleepwalking into a crisis that could be prevented - but won't be.

the_flying_pig

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

...Could you explain why this has not happened so far and what will be the catalyst and supporting factors to change these stats?....

er, because people would want it to happen, because most people would be better off if it did, so they'd vote for whoever woudl make it happen?

very crudely let's assume that today everyone aged 40+ wants HPI [c. 30m people, 50% of population; 67% of whole voting population], everyone aged 20-39 [c. 15m people, 25% of whole population; 33% of voting population] wants lower prices, everyone aged 0-19 [c. 15m people, 25% of whole population; 0% of voting population] either doesn't care or doesn't vote.

if we really do add another 5m immigrants who mostly face overcrowding and/or affordability constraints, plus another 7.5m young people grow up & start to vote and want affordable housing, plus another 7.5m old HPI cheerleaders die off, voters who want HPI will easily slide into a minority.